That's what I said lol

1 hour ago, peterb17 said:

The trouble is these days we walk around with a small powerful computer - it’s almost something from Star Trek - you can talk to it, take videos , instantly up load to Facebook etc - even make a telephone call. 

 

What was quite an innocent pool party has landed several people in trouble. 

 

The concept of privacy seems to have gone - did this guy give permission- of course not. 

 

Sorry- others may disagree- but all this so-called social media causes problems.

( and makes a few extraordinary wealthy) 

 

 

here here

 

8 hours ago, darksidedog said:

The thing I find really funny about this, is that while we are all laughing that they would bother getting into a frenzy over something so petty, these clowns actually think they are helping Pattayas reputation, when in truth they are doing quite the opposite. Amazing Thailand!

They dig there own holes. It's the Thai way

I really like Pattaya and long may its bars flourish.  That said, I completely agree with the fine and probably deportation. No right to bring this in to the public arena. Makes trouble for the rest of us too.

 

Edit: didn't see that it was only a simulated act while clothed. Or that it may have been uploaded without permission.

I think sex tapes are disgusting ... I would be interested in checking just how disgusting this one is though?

2 hours ago, nahkit said:

How can you offend public decency at a private, paid for gathering held on private property?

They shouldn't have posted it on social media. Once they did, it becomes public.

51 minutes ago, BestB said:

He was not in public, but on a private property, he did not asked to be filmed, nor had given permission for video to be posted.

 

It does not say he was on overstay, when you handed over to immigration you get deported, you do not get handed over for a cup of coffee.

 

Furthermore read this again 

 

It was not stated in the story that he was being deported but INN quoted police spokesman Pol Col Krissana Pattanacharoen as saying that the cops had not stood still in the matter and that they were determined to stamp out wrongdoing by foreigners including people on overstay.

 

Yes it was a private party at a private venue, do not need to be a lawyer to figure this one out, unless you think hotel is a public property.

 

There was entry fee which makes it a private party once again held at a privately owned venue.

 

There was no sex act or nudity but silly acting.

 

It makes no difference where hotel is located or where pool is visible, it is still a private property

So if I pay an entry fee to go to a televised football game with 99,999 others at a privately owned ground, you don't consider that to be public?

But then if it is private, you don't need permission to film - or do you always give permission to be filmed with CCTV on private premises?

what about all the BIB simulating being policemen

9 hours ago, webfact said:

The poster pf the clip is now in custody and faces jail.

unbelievable!!!

14 minutes ago, mrfill said:

So if I pay an entry fee to go to a televised football game with 99,999 others at a privately owned ground, you don't consider that to be public?

But then if it is private, you don't need permission to film - or do you always give permission to be filmed with CCTV on private premises?

NUmber of people does not change the status from private to public when its paid events on private property 

1 hour ago, Basil B said:

 

Fact was that hotel pool was over looked.

 

https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/714027/summer-heatwave-2018-sunbathing-naked-warning-police-nude-esther-rantzen

Sure and the Brit was not naked but horseing around 

5 minutes ago, BestB said:

Sure and the Brit was not naked but horseing around 

it was indecent behaviour...

It beats me why some people still use tape for recording video in this digital age. His mobile phone must be huge with those two reels spinning inside......

5 minutes ago, Basil B said:

it was indecent behaviour...

I could agree on inappropriate but not on indecent?

 

but even accepting indicent, is it really worth 5000 and deportation?

 

From memory there have been a number of times where Russians were caught going at it on the beach, from memory fined 1 or 2 thousand and all over.

 

 

3 hours ago, BestB said:

The scary part is he was fined and deported. No court, no judge and really no law was broken , yet fined and deported

Ht has not been determined from this article that he was deported. Do you have confirmation of that?

No more disco for me.

If you dance and someones is humping against you it can be seen as an indecent sex act.

Ridiculous.

8 minutes ago, MaxYakov said:

Ht has not been determined from this article that he was deported. Do you have confirmation of that?

No I do not , do you know what happens and reasons when you get hand over to immigration ?

 

usually deportation unless he has good friends who can arrange for this to go away.

 

If it was just to check his legal status , they would not need to hand him over, only open his passport and if visa or overstay was the case, I am certain they would have mentioned it 

A1 is along side beach rd,newly remodeled with the pool in the front completely open with no fencing,this is just ''dirty dancing '' as us old farts call it..I doubt it was as bad as they are claiming ...I walked by ,A1 partys are generally a flop( they have them about once  month with guest dj's),but that night it was unusually busy with young people ,thais and foreingers.,no kids or families...

4 minutes ago, terminatorchiangmai said:

No more disco for me.

If you dance and someones is humping against you it can be seen as an indecent sex act.

Ridiculous.

If someone films it and posts on social media , have your bags packed and ready ?

Looks like a triple-layer stupidity sandwich to me. Not the most enjoyable of threesomes.

28 minutes ago, BestB said:

I could agree on inappropriate but not on indecent?

 

but even accepting indicent, is it really worth 5000 and deportation?

 

From memory there have been a number of times where Russians were caught going at it on the beach, from memory fined 1 or 2 thousand and all over.

 

 

Simulated sex acts are indecent behaviour...

 

As for being deported, if true maybe he has overstayed (his welcome).

1 minute ago, Basil B said:

Simulated sex acts are indecent behaviour...

 

As for being deported, if true maybe he has overstayed (his welcome).

But half the fine for actual sex acts?

1 minute ago, BestB said:

But half the fine for actual sex acts?

Do not think just over a hundred quid excessive for a Brit...

 

If you had been following the story the police have made it clear that they intend to catch (as many as they can) those responsible and make an example of them to discourage others from the same behaviour.

3 minutes ago, Basil B said:

Do not think just over a hundred quid excessive for a Brit...

 

If you had been following the story the police have made it clear that they intend to catch (as many as they can) those responsible and make an example of them to discourage others from the same behaviour.

I am not talking actual money , as I said before , they busted numerous Russians actually having sex on the beach , in full view of the public and fine was 1 or 2 thousand and all over.

 

this time.  Not only no sex but dressed and at a private location and they going full speed ahead.

 

hardly fair or reasonable. Why not charge him with whatever offence they like and let him go to court .

 

i am certain with a half retarded lawyer this case would be thrown out or dismissed. 

 

Instead they hand him over to immigration, so even if he wanted to dispute this charges, he can not 

Pathetic.

So next time boys, remember no videos or photos please....lol

when he gets back to the UK  he can sell his story to the Media 

we should no doubt be reading his side of the story soon 

2 hours ago, cookieqw said:

here here

 

 

Here, there, and everywhere.

 

Anyway, the Brit who was filmed could, and should, sue the person who posted the clip for damages.

9 hours ago, colinneil said:

Pattaya known all over the world for being the easiest place to get what ever you desire sexually.

With out that reputation it would be like a ghost town.

Yet here you have a bunch of clowns getting their knickers in a twist over what?

A man having a little fun with a lady, no sex , no nudity, no offence to others at the party, but little upstarts who have not been getting any attention make a big song and dance over it, IDIOTS, you will just get tourists going elsewhere in future.

Then the copper goes home to his mia noi and tells her what a good boy he's been, sorting out those immoral falang.

2 hours ago, mrfill said:

So if I pay an entry fee to go to a televised football game with 99,999 others at a privately owned ground, you don't consider that to be public?

But then if it is private, you don't need permission to film - or do you always give permission to be filmed with CCTV on private premises?

In many US states, you are not in public at a football game. This is where public intoxication law comes into play in the States. You can be drunk on private premises such as a football game or bar but not in public which actually includes being in private cars on public roads in some states. Pertaining to your CCTV comment, you are correct but the video of the party was not CCTV but from a person’s personal recording and those need permission every time if there is an assumption of privacy. A private party with an entrance fee would probably qualify for inclusion of an assumption of privacy. In conclusion, I can understand the arguments of many posters that disagree with your statements about the party being public and filming rights due to the laws back home. Here, I have no idea what the laws are in regard to public/private and filming others.